HOME

Thursday, July 18, 2013

BPSC MODERATION: WHAT HONORABLE JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN SAID

Honorable Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan order regarding BPSC
moderation on 53-55th mains examination (CWJC 9569/2013, 9674/2013 and many more) is now on public domain.
However, all details of hearing are not in order copy, and also honorable Justice
hasn’t passed any judgment, except accepting references of Honorable apex court
judgment and referring it to the honorable Chief Justice of Patna High Court.
In whole order copy, one is petitioner’s views and one is BPSC counsel view.
Only at one point Justice Ravi Ranjan has accepted that apex court has said
that moderation is not sufficient in case where multi-subjects examination is
held. Honorable Ravi Ranjan said:

“From perusal of the aforesaid it would appear that the Apex Court has come
to the conclusion that the procedure of moderation would only solve the problem
of examiner Variability, where the examiners are many but valuation of
answer-scripts in respect of a single subject is done and all the subjects are
compulsory, however, moderation would be no answer where the problem would be
to find out inter se merit across the subjects where examination has been
conducted in different subjects. It has been held that, in order to solve the
problem of inter se merit across different subjects, statistical experts have
evolved a method known as scaling that is creation of a common scale. On that
pretext it is being urged that, since admittedly, the Bihar Public Service
Commission had adopted method of moderation for bringing uniformity which has
already been held insufficient and improper in such examination by the Apex
Court where different subjects are to be opted by different candidates, that
has resulted in disparity in the scoring by the candidates in the different
subjects.”

It also says “It is submitted that the Bihar Public Service Commission
has adopted moderation and not the method of scaling in violation of the
direction of the Division Bench contained in Annexure 6 which was passed on the
basis of the judgment of the Apex
Court in the judgment of Sanjay Singh (supra).”

One more thing, Justice Ravi Ranjan also mentioned Prashant
Ramesh Chakrawar (supra) case. But let me remind you that in that case 6 steps
of moderation is mentioned, and this judgment came in February 2013. But at
that point of time, BPSC has already moderated answer sheets of students.
Because in its affidavit BPSC clearly said that decision on moderation was
taken in mid January 2013. It clears that BPSC violated the double bench order
which has said until you make any rule, follow Sanjay Singh direction of Supreme
Court. As said above that in Sanjay Singh case Supreme Court has favored
scaling in those examinations where optional papers exist. It is also clear
that (according to BPSC affidavit) so far BPSC hasn’t framed any rule regarding
moderation or scaling. It means no rules were framed then Sanjay Singh (supra)
order has to be followed. Even Chakrawar steps were not followed. BPSC didn’t
followed any steps, because honorable Justice had said BPSC counsel during
hearing that you didn’t prepare a model answer which was one of the steps of
Chakrawar moderation formula.

Second and more important, BPSC has clearly stated in its
affidavit that moderation was done on those students who scored more than 60%
marks and less than 30% marks. This has not been mentioned in order copy. But
one must not forget that after repeatedly asking, BPSC didn’t elaborate its
process of moderation. Hence this
serious issue is going to be raised in the larger bench.

One can draw many conclusions, but matter is serious and has
to be dealt carefully. That is why Honorable Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan has
referred it to the larger bench, where most probably Honorable the Chief
Justice of Patna High Court Rekha M. Doshit will chair the bench. Since no
written stay is there, hence BPSC might declare the final result, but BPSC
counsel has promised the Judge (Dr. Justice Ravi Ranjan) that no result will be published until case
isresolved, even BPSC is also saying
that until case is pending no result will come. Let us see whether oral promise
of stay is maintained which needs moral. About BPSC morality------?

30 comments:

Mr. Ratish Jha do you have any moral value, if you dont know the complete things then why you are making issue , and I also feel without moderation result should come so you will understand your position, if scaling was done then also you people were in the court....and if you were so concerned then whynot you reported reservation's case earlier....so this show ur morality....i am free to comment since we are residing in a democratic country.

dear,ratish jee first of all a big thank u for providing us such a valuable information.and secondly,there is a request to all of my friends specially,niraj singh,sathi mitra,abhishek raj,aiok kumar,jayesh bhai etc that this is right time for right action.so plz guide us with ur valuable thinking.

In PT case, BPSC is agree to publish extra result and hold seperate mains examination, but Honorable Judge is rigid to declare fresh preliminary result and hold fresh mains of all candidates. Even petitioners are rigid that no separate mains examination should be held but single mains for all. Judge gave BPSC one week time, judgment on 29th July.